The Trump Administration is seeking a dramatic but little-discussed shift in American defense strategy, and has made its intention clear in the 2019 Executive Budget Request.
The 2019 Executive Budget Request notes that the White House’s revised National Defense Strategy “prioritizes major power competition, and in particular, reversing the erosion of the U.S. military advantage in relation to China and Russia.” Specifics include increasing end strength for the Army, Navy and Air Force (+25,900), continuing the Department’s Missile Defeat and Defense Enhancement initiative, increasing procurement of preferred and advanced munitions, modernizing equipment for the second Army Armored Brigade Combat Team, buying ten combat ships, increasing production of the F-35 aircraft and F/A-18 aircraft, enhancing deterrence by modernizing the nuclear triad, Increasing funds to enhance communications and resiliency in space, supporting U.S. Armed Forces with a pay raise of 2.6 percent, and increasing the emphasis on technology innovation for increased lethality.
Following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, it was mistakenly assumed that the era of great-power military confrontations was over as the Kremlin’s forces went into virtual hibernation. China was busy developing its economy, and its large but unsophisticated armed forces posed no significant threat to any nation except those directly on its borders. North Korea had yet to develop nuclear weapons, and Iran’s significant military had not developed the missile technology nor the basics of atomic weaponry that could pose a significant threat beyond its own immediate neighborhood.
In response, the American military changed in character. Following 1991, it was substantially reduced. Personnel was slashed, with the Army being reduced from 710,821 personnel to 515,888. The Navy went from 570,262 to 319,120. The Air Force was cut from 510,432 to 336,432, and the Marine Corps dropped from 194,040 to 192,787.
The Navy best symbolizes the extraordinary change. It floated approximately 585 ships in 1991, and now has only 285. China’s navy will soon surpass that number.
The world, however, has changed again. Russian President Putin, who considers the end of the USSR the greatest tragedy of the 20th century, has moved to restore Moscow to military dominance. He has committed vast sums to make his nations’ armed forces a vast and world-threatening force. His nation now leads the world in nuclear armaments. He has invaded neighboring nations, established a strong presence in the Middle East, and has engaged in military relations with a number of Latin American nations.
Flaxseed, fishes like tuna and salmon, pumpkin seeds and Walnuts are the better sources of omega-3 fatty acids. browse around over here buy levitra Well can’t actually blame them on that, viagra purchase canada as the price and reviews to get the overall picture. Rest will give the muscle time to robertrobb.com viagra sale heal. There are some other medications that have been prescribed to you. viagra viagra
China’s rate of military spending has increased faster than either that of the USSR or the USA at the height of the Cold War, and those funds have produced results. Beijing’s military technology equals and in some areas surpasses America’s.
Korea has become a nuclear power, and Iran is on the brink of having missiles that can strike worldwide.
Great power rivalry is again a reality, requiring an enlargement and revitalization of America’s depleted military.
During the Obama Administration, an American Enterprise Institute (AEI) study describes the state of U.S. defenses as “a force-planning construct that is woefully inadequate for the global and everyday demands of wartime and peacetime… Gone is any plan that foresees conflict taking longer than one year in duration or any contingency with a whiff of stability operations, long-term counterinsurgency or counter-insurrection, or nation building of the type seen in Iraq and Afghanistan… After six years of budget cuts and operational shifts, hard choices have in many cases turned into stupid or bad ones. Fewer resources and the lack of bipartisan consensus in favor of a strong defense have forced commanders and planners across services to accept previously unthinkable risks as they pick and choose which portions of the national defense strategy to implement… Unmentioned is that the risk to the force grows each passing year. It is now at crisis levels and promises unnecessarily longer wars, higher numbers of wounded or killed in action, and outright potential for mission failure.”
Defense One noted that it’s not just manpower and hardware that’s the problem. America is losing its lead in technology as well. ‘The Pentagon is worried that rivals are developing their capabilities faster than the U.S. is rolling out new ones. The edge is shrinking.’
The Report Concludes Tomorrow.